Jump to content

Did Jets’ Maccagnan Pull an Idzik in Draft?


JetNation

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, thadude said:

Macc - Glennon (FA), Prescott, Kizer

Really? You're gonna go with THIS? Glennon??? Kizer??? 

And you know who else passed on Prescott. 31 other GMs, including the Cowboys GM, who passed on him 4 times! Dak was picked in the BOTTOM of the 4th round with the Cowboys comp pick.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bitonti said:

the difference between Mac and Idzik is that Mac actually hits on middle round picks. Brandon Shell is going to start for 10 years. 

Macs resume is built right.    For that reason I WAS excited.   So far, it feels very Jets like.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bitonti said:

Deon Simon was a pretty good 7th rounder. Juston Burris could start, as could Mauldin. If we consider how many picks Idzik had (12 total picks in 2014 draft, Mac has had 14 total in 2015 and 2016), Mac is hitting mid/late rounders at double the rate of Idzik. 

I think there's an issue when we're comfortable with "marginally better than" Idzik, when it comes to the draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

For when Glen-dog comes rifling back comparing Leonard Williams to Brett Perriman and then says something about Lac Edwards:

 

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2017/04/nfl-draft-performance-grades-best-drafting-teams-picks-classes-2012-2016

Forgot the Steelers.  Colbert is wayyyyy up there too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, PepPep said:

Really? You're gonna go with THIS? Glennon??? Kizer??? 

And you know who else passed on Prescott. 31 other GMs, including the Cowboys GM, who passed on him 4 times! Dak was picked in the BOTTOM of the 4th round with the Cowboys comp pick.  

30 other GM's didn't pass on Prescott for Hack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, southparkcpa said:

The same 6 to 10 teams seem to dominate over last 25 years.    It's no accident.    It's QB and management.  We have neither.   

Or the other option is Mangini as GM and Rex as HC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, thadude said:

Neither Idzik nor Macc are good at evaluating talent.  That's why Idzik is fetching Starbucks orders in Jacksonville and Macc will be doing the same this time next year in Houston

 

Let's look at the Qb's Idzik passed on: Glennon, Carr, Bridgewater, Garropolo 

 

Macc - Glennon (FA), Prescott, Kizer

 

Glennon was paid too high, given that he saw the team stinking this year, and next year being an oppy to draft a QB high.

2018 could be the year the Jets do a Glennon + pick.  The Bears are deeper into the regime and feeling more pressure.

Kizer?  Jury out on that.   Macc was not going to go Webb or Peterman until he figured out Petty and Hack.

40 minutes ago, southparkcpa said:

Macs resume is built right.    For that reason I WAS excited.   So far, it feels very Jets like.    

Common Denominator:  Woody.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, T0mShane said:

For when Glen-dog comes rifling back comparing Leonard Williams to Breshad Perriman and then says something about Lac Edwards:

 

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2017/04/nfl-draft-performance-grades-best-drafting-teams-picks-classes-2012-2016

No need.  As soon as I typed the question I realized this is going to be one of those "debates" where any good Macagnan has done can't be considered because it's too early, but any negative is already set in stone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Augustiniak said:

yet the secondary cost the team several games last year.  how many more times are you willing to watch the jets defense make a scrub TE look like a star?  for all the picks they've spent on defense, nobody has been able to cover a TE or the deep middle of the field.  

Several? Maybe 1 or 2, and in truth probably not even that many were fully the fault of the secondary (sucky as they often did play).

If we'd put more points on the board (or didn't surrender any special teams points at just the wrong time) then our secondary woudn't have even been a factor. If we surrendered 30+ or 40+ points what difference does it make when the offense isn't scoring more than 10 points themselves? 

You can't watch our offense score barely 17ppg and then blame the secondary every time the team loses. It's unrealistic to expect the defense to keep everybody under 20 points to shield themselves from all blame. Or when we keep Brady and the 28ppg Pats to 22 points - and then Fitzpatrick fumbles away our final possession - it's ridiculous to claim the secondary cost the team the game when they played above average overall.

IMO it's a copout to say, as some did last year, "Well the offense scored 22 so they did their job," (or however many points scored in a given contested loss). There were so many points left on the field last year, even in games where we did manage to score over 20 ourselves. You have to take points when they're there. The Bengals game? Cincy's defense was so awful that scoring over 30 points should have been a given that game. But we put up only 22 (even with a missed chip shot FG and a missed XP) and I sense you're still nevertheless fully blaming the secondary for that loss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Except one position is generally considered a far higher priority position than the other, is more important to nail completely, and is less forgiving if we half-whiffed/half-nailed-it on those picks.

On paper if a draft is so deep at a position (i.e. one can find good, starter talent later) then it hardly seems a good allocation of resources to use multiple higher picks - particularly a really high pick, no matter how "sure thing" he is - on said deep position. Even more so when that deep position isn't generally considered a premiere one in the first place, compared to others where the team is also in need of improvement.

As you say, it seems to make more sense to hold off to where the draft's sweet spot is for that position, and then the high picks can be used at positions that are not only more important and harder to fill, but at which there is a much steeper dropoff with each passing round in that draft.

I'll leave overall rating this draft strength to others, but if a draft is crazy deep at a position, that depth often starts to really thin out in the 3rd-4th rounds. For that very same reason, though, it's where the relative value is greatest. Taking the deepest position (safety) so early is not the way to maximize the draft's strength at that position. Likewise, taking a deep position (CB) so late usually means you waited too long and are now tapping into no better pool of players you'd get in any other draft (where those positions' prospects weren't so comparatively strong). 

Granted, it's theoretical because players are drafted, not the draft class aggregately. Even in an allegedly thin draft class, at a given position, one can still hit (and hit later at that). It's just harder to do.

I have no idea why they didn't go Sidney Jones in the second round this year.  I think if King was there, he might have been a target, but Jones was a stud press corner.   It wasn't just that it was deep, it was loaded in talent.  I think most years, King or Wilson are first round guys, sort of like how Allen Robinson or Donte Moncrief dropped a few years ago.  

This draft was deep at TE, S, CB, RB.  We went all in on safety depth, and waited quite a bit for everything else.  In theory, waiting should return the most on investment, I just don't like the position they picked to go deep at.  If they had gone Adams-Jones, I would have been perfectly fine.  Lattimore-Maye, perfectly fine.  Howard-Maye, somewhat fine.  

I think they should have done at CB, what they did at WR.  Instead of Stewart and Hansen (who I like btw, I just don't think they were priority) I wish they went Sutton (who may have been a first round pick if he didn't get hurt in college) or Tankersly (who I thought had a ton of potential) in the 3rd with Desmond King in the 4th.  So with the CB picks, I would have rather had Isiah Ford and Dupree or KD Cannon.  I think they stuck to the deep part of this draft with limited picks, but the two WRs in the middle deviated from the plan.  It would have been much better if I could replace Marcus Williams and Dexter McDougle with Sutton/Tankersly and King instead of replacing Quinton Patton and I guess Jalin Marshall with Stewart/Hansen.  I like the potential of the receivers, I just thought our resources were better spent with the WR/CB tandem being reversed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, BigRy56 said:

By all accounts, the Jets had a very strong draft. I don't ever remember anybody feeling that way about any of Idzik's drafts.

The feeling seems to be that they got some good players and that's fine.

The parallel is that both GM's had a chance to address their roster's top need in drafts that were insanely deep at that position of need.

Idzik passed on the WR's early and the first two WR's he chose have a total of 1 catch for 7 yards in the NFL.

The 2017 Jets need some CB's and in another draft with TONS of talent at CB, they waited until round 6 to take a CB.

This isn't to say whether or not the '17 draft was good or not, but pointing out that both GM's ignored what was arguably their top need outside of QB (in their minds, anyway) and blew it off, waiting until the mid/late rounds to address it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, thadude said:

Neither Idzik nor Macc are good at evaluating talent.  That's why Idzik is fetching Starbucks orders in Jacksonville and Macc will be doing the same this time next year in Houston

 

Let's look at the Qb's Idzik passed on: Glennon, Carr, Bridgewater, Garropolo 

 

Macc - Glennon (FA), Prescott, Kizer

 

Glennon is ass, No one knew Prescott was gunna be anything decent not even the Cowboys, Kizer who knows

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, bitonti said:

Deon Simon was a pretty good 7th rounder. Juston Burris could start, as could Mauldin. If we consider how many picks Idzik had (12 total picks in 2014 draft, Mac has had 14 total in 2015 and 2016), Mac is hitting mid/late rounders at double the rate of Idzik. 

Sorry, but neither Burris nor Mauldin are worth roster slots this season, let alone next.  Which is a bummer because I really was pulling for Mauldin.  He's overcome a ton in his young life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Augustiniak said:

i disagree b/c the jets also needed 2 safeties in a deep class and mccags jumped all over that.  he did not ignore the secondary early on, just like he didn't ignore offense.  the offensive skill players he picked are considered good prospects by most outlets.  if mccags did not address the secondary until, say, the 3rd round, then i could see the comparisons.

The Jets needed one safety.  Pryor isn't the stud we'd hoped for, but he's decent at the position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Several? Maybe 1 or 2, and in truth probably not even that many were fully the fault of the secondary (sucky as they often did play).

 

We had 0.0 pass rush and our offense was attrocious and couldn't stay on the field but it's all the secondary's fault

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, sirlancemehlot said:

The Jets needed one safety.  Pryor isn't the stud we'd hoped for, but he's decent at the position.

If Pryor was even mediocre, not decent but mediocre, we wouldn't have needed two safeties

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, joewilly12 said:

If they start Josh McCown at QB are we really rebuilding with a 38 year old QB? 

JW:  I would say yes, JM is not intended to be the QB.  He is a place holder and mentor for younger guys.  They have to play the younger guys and see if either of them is the one.  If not, they will draft another next year.  IMO it did not make any sense at all to invest in a QB or draft one of the posers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...